Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-02-15-Speech-3-591-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-02-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Deposit guarantee schemes (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"bg"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120215.27.3-591-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-02-15-Speech-3-592-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Dimitar Stoyanov2
lpv:spokenAs	member; NA (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; AGRI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Attack (2009-07-14--2012-06-01)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; REGI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; JURI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I would like to start off by thanking all of my colleagues who have given me this opportunity today to address the plenary on behalf of the Committee on Legal Affairs. When reviewing the proposal for a directive on deposit guarantee schemes, the first task for the Committee on Legal Affairs was to investigate the legal basis for approving this act. The act was found to be in accordance with the Treaties. Following this review, the Committee approved a total of 16 proposals for amendments to the directive, some of which were accepted by the committee responsible and some were not. The underlying problem, one of the main suggestions of the Committee on Legal Affairs, was to do with the payout period, with the Committee proposing an extension of this period of up to four weeks. Our reason for this was that we consulted with a number of deposit guarantee schemes. We were therefore convinced that the payout period of five business days is practically impossible. On this point, I do not wish to disagree with the opinion given by the rapporteur and the Commissioner, who state that in the event of any bank going bankrupt, people still have to provide for themselves. I am of the opinion that no one supports themselves by relying solely on their savings. I believe that enabling the schemes to invest and work with their assets is much more important because, as it stands at the moment, their available assets will have to be kept liquid almost permanently in order to meet the short payout period. The other two proposals related to lending between schemes have, I see, been removed altogether from the directive by the committee responsible. Therefore, our proposal has become pointless despite our considerable efforts to improve it. With regard to the delegated acts, as mentioned in the very beginning, we extended the objection period from one to two months, although the approach based on three plus three months, which I support, has already been adopted."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph